Mr. Pramod Kumar Agarwal vs. State Of Telangana

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

^ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.11454 &.11984 OF 2023 COM,I ON ORDER: l Since the parties to these two criminal petiti<lns are same, and since these two criminal petitions are fited by the parties one against the other, these two criminal petitions are disposed of by way of this common order. 2 Heard Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned counset representing Sri Koushik Kanduri. learned counsel for the petitioners tn Crt.P.No.11454 of 2023 and learned counsel for the respondents in Crt.P.No.'11984 of 2023 and Sri A.Rajashekhar Rerddy, [earned Speciat Pubtic Prosecutor for GST appearing for the petitioners in Crt.P.No.11984 of 2023 and for the respondents in Crt.P.No.11454 of 2023 and Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. 3 Crt.P.No.11454 of 2073 is fited seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1706 of 2020 on the fite of the C.ourt of the Xl Additionat Chief Metropotitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, registered

2 for the offences punishabte under sections 332, 186, 506 and 5M rlw 34 of lPC. 4 The facts that lead to the fiting of Crt.P.No.11454 of 2023.are that on 11.12.2019 at 08.30 pm the second respondent l.e Mr.Awanindra Kumar, lntel[igence Officer, Office of Directorate Genera[ of GST lntetligence, New Delhi todged a comptaint with the Mahankati police atleging that on that day they entered the premises of M/s. MS AgarwaL Foundries Pvt. Limited, Rama. Towers, 5-4-83,znd Floor, TSK Chambers, MG Road, Secunderabad under search authorisation dated 10.12.2019 in connection with enquiry of GST matter. During the pretiminary investigation one Mr.Gautam, nephew of the petitioners in this criminal petition misbehaved with the second respondent and his team and even attempted to assault the officers, which resutted injury in the inside part of the upper [ip as wetl as he atso physicatty assaulted the Deputy Director of Directorate Generat of GST and caused injury on his right forearm. The petitioners atso threatened and intimidated the officers with dire consequences. The second petitioner herein ran away from the premises by taking away one pen drive and hard disc containing data which could have unearthed the clandestine some vitdl

3 clearance resutting in recovery of crores of GST white search proceedings were sti[[ going on. 5 Basing on the above altegations a case in Cr.No.232 of 2019 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 332, 186, 506 and 504 rlw 34 of IPC against the petitioners rrr Cr[.p.No.11454 of 7023. After completion of investigation the potice fited charge sheet which was numbered as C.C.No.'l 706 of Z0Z0 on the fite of the Court of the Xl Additionat Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. As stated supra, seeking to quash the said proceedings, the petitioners filed the present Criminat petition No.11454 of 2023. 6 The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that when the second respondent and his team of officers started abusing the petitioners, the petitioners defended themsetves. ln that process, the second respondent himself manhandted the petitioners. The officers had turned off the power connection and CC TV cameras and misbehaved and manhandled the petitioners and their staff. ln that connection though the petitioners todged a comptaint, the potice did not take any action thereon as the second respondent

4 and his team are highty inftuentia[ central team. He further submitted that since the officers manhandled the petitioners resulting in serious injuries, they had to undergo treatment in a private hospitat as the potice did not take any action and also in view of the fact that the potice did not register any case against the GST officiats for their manhandting the petitioners herein, the petitioners fited a private complaint on the fite of the Court of the Xl Additionat Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad for the offences punishabte under Sections 323, 330, 357 and 506 rlw 34 lPC, which was registered as C.C.No.100'l of 2020. He further contended that the petitioners herein without even disclosing search authorisation started search and upon questioning the same, the petitioners beat the second respondent and his staff. He lastty contended that there are no overt acts attributed to the petitioners and hence continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of [aw. 7 Be that as it may, contending that in the very same transaction the petitioners in Cr[.P.No.11984 of 2023 beat the third respondent and his uncte and that the officers, without even disclosing search authorisation caused hurt to the comptainant

----- 5 therein voluntarity in order to compel them to confess the offences under GST Act, the petitioners in Crt.P.No.11454 of 2023 todged a private comptaint before the Court of XX Additionat Chief Metropotitan Magistrate at Secunderabad which was registered as C.C.No.1001 of 2020 on the fite of the said Court for the atteged offences punishabte under Sections 323, 330, 357 and 506 r/w 34 of lPC. Seeking to quash the said proceedings, the petitioners fited Crt.P. No. 1 1984 of 2073. 8 The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners in Crt.P.No.11984 of 2023 is that the Court beLow without fottowing due process of [aw had taken cognizance of the offences against the petitioners as the allegations [eve[[ed against the petitioners were made white they were performing officiat duties in their capacities as pubtic servants and as such sanction under Section 197 Cr.p.C is mandatory and that an order of sanction is pre-requisite before Magistrate to issue summons to the accused. 1-herefore, the juri iction of the Court was barred without the previous sanction. Moreover, the tria[ Court also faited to consider that the petitioners were protected under Section 157 of the GST Act. He further submitted that present case is a counter case to the case atready

6 todged by the petitioners herein against the petitioners corresponding to Criminal Petition No.11454 of 7073. Crl.P.No.1 1454 of 2023: 9 lt is to be seen from the facts and attegations made in Crt.P.No.I1454 of 2023 that the inspecting team consists of 11 members, further there are two more panchayat dars. The attegation was that when the inspecting team was conducting search some attercation took ptace and in that the petitioners in Crt.P.No.11454 of 2023 beat the second respondent therein causing hurt to his upper tip and also caused injury to Sri Manish Kumar Yadav, who was one of the Deputy Director of Directorate General of GST lntetligence, on his right fore arm. When the officials consisting of eteven and more so when they are in dominating position, being officers of the Central Government, the possibitity of the petitioners being 3 in number causing hurt to the officers is too remote because when the petitioners are aggravating the situation, the other officers woutd not keep quite. Further, there are no specific overt acts attributed to the petitioners in this criminal petition. Except levelling batd and omnibus attegations

7 there is no incriminating material to find fautt witlr the petitioners in this criminal petition. At one stage the second respondent herein state that the petitioner No.Z Gopat Agarwal ran ah,ay with one pen drive and hard disk contrary to the statement given by the oiher witness that the petitioner No.1 pramod Kumar Ar3arwal took the computer and other materiat. But there is no mention of which computer or any other specific detaits. More so, the lT professionats who accompanied them did not mention about it in their statements. Hence I do not see any prima facie case'against the petitioners herein for the alreged offences and accordingty, the proceedings against the petitioners are [iable to be quashed. Crl.P.No.1 1984 of 2023: 10 lt is true that the Court below without fo[owing due process of law had taken cognizance of the offences against the petitioners as the atlegations [evetted against the petitioners were admittedty made while they were performing official duties in their capacities as pubtic servants and as such sanction under Section 197 Cr.p.C is mandatory and that an order of sanction is pre_requisite before Magistrate to issue summons to the accused. Therefore, the 8 juri iction of the Court was barred without the previous sanction. Moreover, the trial Court atso faited to consider that the petitioners were protected under Section 157 of the GST Act. Section 157 (7) of the GST Act says that 'No suit, prosecution or other [ega[ proceedings shatl tie against the officer appointed or authorised under this Act for anything which is done or intended to be done in good faith under this Act or the Rules made thereunder. Therefore, the court betow ought not to have taken cognizance of the offences. Moreover, it is atso to be seen that these two cases are case and counter case. Hence I am of the considered view that continuation of proceedings against the petitioners in this criminal petition is nothing but abuse of process of [aw. 11 Accordingty, both the criminal petitions are atlowed. ln consequence thereof, the proceedings against the petitioners in both the petitions viz., in C.C.No.1001 of 7020 on the fite of the court of XX Additionat Chief Metropotitan Magistrate, Secunderabad (Cr[.P.No.11984 of 2023) and C.C.No.1706 of 2020 on the fite of Xl Additionat Chief Metropotitan Magistrate, Secunderabad (Cr[.P.No.11454 of 2023) are hereby quashed,l

tt' rl 9 12 As a seque[, miscellaneous petitions pending in both the petitions shatl stand closed. . A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR //// ECTION OFFICER

HIGH COURT DATE D :0 210412025 COMMON ORDER CRLP.Nos.11454 and 11984 ot 2023 ALLOWING BOTH THE CRIMINAL PETITIONS. ,-i-,f,''ii-:... \, j" \i'\ 0 I Ai,;t 2[25 {)c.S PAT C\TcO l' t ) l :l 1